Environmental Update (July 2009)

Waste Management - Decisions in Court

Intention to 'discard' is critical in determining whether waste is 'waste'

The High Court has upheld a decision by Stockport Magistrates Court, ruling that rubble, derived from demolition works and transported to another site to be used as hardcore, was NOT waste because there had never been any intention to discard the material.

In July 2006 the owner of a garden centre demolished a greenhouse in order to make way for a new building. Demolition material was retained at the site as the owner wanted to put it to some other use in his business, intending to transfer some of the material to his other garden centre to be used as hardcore in works to repair a car park.

In August 2006 some of the demolition material was duly transported to and deposited at the other garden centre by a waste carrier. The Company was subsequently charged, but acquitted by Stockport Magistrates Court, of two charges under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, namely:

• that contrary to s34(1)(a) they had failed to inform the owner of the garden centre of his need to hold a waste management licence (WML) in order to deposit controlled waste on land; and  
• that contrary to s33(1)(a) they had deposited controlled waste on land at the garden centre in spite of there being no WML in force authorising the deposit.

The High Court found that the owner of the garden centre never had any intention of discarding the material, that it was never surplus to requirement but was a valuable commodity intended for immediate re-use. Taking all the circumstances into account the court considered the demolition material not to be waste for the purposes of the EPA and the Waste Framework Directive (WFD) 2006/12/EC, and, thus dismissed the charges.

Prosecution- Exeter Calendar Firms Fined for Waste Packaging Offences

Two sister companies selling calendars and gifts have been ordered to pay nearly £10,000 in fines and costs for packaging offences. The companies are based in Exeter and carry out a large amount of recycling, but none if it was registered or recorded at the time of the offence, although both firms had met the requirements to register as a producer of packaging.

The regulations state that all companies with a turnover of more than £2m and handling >50 tonnes of packaging a year are legally required to register with the appropriate Environment Agency or with an approved compliance scheme. To be compliant a company must register with the Agency by 7th April each year and provide evidence of recycling and recovery by purchasing packaging waste recovery notes (PRNs). It is an offence not to register.

Since being approached by the EA both companies have taken steps to ensure they are registered for 2008. Failure to comply in previous years has resulted in the two companies avoiding costs of approximately £1,800 and £2,000 respectively.

The companies who operate a series of retail calendar shops, were fined £6,000 plus ordered to pay costs and compensations after pleading guilty to six offences under the Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations, including failing to register and provide a certificate of compliance.